Praise for Scott Brown Being Reserved

February 1, 2010

Scott Brown's election to one of Massachusetts' Senate seats was a foregone conclusion to anyone watching the polls. Martha Coakley did not stand a chance on Election Day. She was a dead woman walking for trying to sugar-coat her support of unpopular policies. No number of busses packed with ACORN-bought voters or SEIU members could have saved her from her own incompetence.

But I am bothered. In the wake of Mr. Brown's victory I see a lot of Conservatives acting little better than giddy and foolish Democrats did upon the accession of Barack Obama to the left hand of Nancy Pelosi Almighty. Many of my fellow patriots on the right and correct side of the aisle have a lot of good things to say about Scott Brown and his successful election bid for one of Massachusetts' Senate seats. But at times they are downright deifying this man as the savior of our Republic. While breaking the filibuster proof majority of the liberal Democrats in the Senate may be an important move, need I remind you that there is still Olympia Snowe lurking in the chamber's shadows for her shot at the limelight. And need I remind you that she can certainly not be trusted to form a coherent thought or support the concept of limited government?

Oh, I'm so sorry. I did not mean to crash you back to Earth so hard. Actually, yeah, I did.

Scott Brown is certainly not Barack Obama and Brown's ardent supporters celebrating his election are certainly not the same mindless sort of moonbats that flocked to Obama's feet for a chance that maybe they would be allowed to touch the hem on his garments. But seriously, some of the praise going on for a man that has not sat in the Senate for one day nor cast a single vote is bordering on insanity. I do not question that Mr. Brown leans to the right. I only question how far. By the looks of things not enough people are using such a skeptical eye.

Call me crazy. Call me old-fashioned. But even though I am not from Missouri I still must proudly sit here and demand of Mr. Brown, "Show me." That's right Mr. Brown, you have the spotlight now. But show me what you will do when that spotlight fades and you are just 1 of 100 members of the Senate. Show me what you will do when others approach you to play ball in typical Washington fashion.

Talking the talk is what you have done so far while on the campaign trail. Now show me that you can walk the walk in Washington. I do not care about what you did up in Massachusetts as one of a mere handful of Republicans in State office. I don't care what you said on the campaign trail. The game has changed. State politics are wholly different than national politics with a whole new set of even more limited rules of power to follow. The box of what you can do on the federal level is much smaller and you must show me that you can translate to that role.

If it comes across that I am skeptical, then good. That is my point and I think it is as plain as the marijuana growing in Barney Frank's love partner's basement. What bothers me with Mr. Brown is that in answering reporter's questions this week he talked a lot about voting for bills that were good for his state. I did not hear him mention the Constitutionality of the bill being a major part of his decision making process. This has been a major complaint I have with many people who purport to be conservative in order to get elected.

Questions, questions everywhere - and all have yet to be answered.

Will Mr. Brown, now Senator Brown, have the courage to do the things that a true conservative would once he takes his place in the Senate? Will he embrace the Constitution and vote against all laws that, while they might be good for his State, violate that document's limited mandates of power? Will he have the guts to vote against any and every bill that comes before the Senate which contains one iota of unconstitutionality snuck into it by wicked people seeking power over our liberty? Will he have the fortitude to stand before his colleagues in the well of the Senate and chastise those who propose powers to our government which are strictly forbidden and do so regardless of party? Will he turn his nose up at spending more than the government takes in and reject burdening our children with obscene debts to lubricate the votes of special interests and a minority of Americans? Will he exhibit the courage needed to start paring back and proposing cuts or outright elimination of unconstitutional programs already on the books? Will he reject the fallacy of bipartisanship when such a tactic requires compromises to limited government?

Or will Mr. Brown be what really passes for a "conservative" in Washington and the Republican Party? Will he simply oppose the most egregious of new usurpations of liberty and only when the American people speak up loudly enough for him to take notice while he helps to pass ones of a lesser nature that he thinks we will not find out about or later object to? Will he cast his vote in favor of yearly budgets that cannot be paid for like so many of his colleagues do? Will he attack only the Democrats but not hold his fire against Republicans who act no better? Will he not have the courage to touch any of the now numerous third rails of American politics? Will he run to embrace those on the other side of the aisle even when their proposals are hideous and against all reason in the name of working together?

When these questions are answered I will pass judgment on Scott Brown as a Senator, as a Republican and as a conservative. When he shows me that he is worthy of praise, only then shall I give it to him. But at every instance where he mocks our freedom, violates our federal charter with egregious overreaches of power and scoffs at our founding documents I promise you I will be his loudest critic.

Why should the savior of our Republic who apparently has stopped Obamacare and any number of other heinous abridgements of our liberties be treated any differently than I treat any other member of Congress?